Is anyone else concerned about the proposed “faster pace” of combat?

[Xyntech]

I'm in favor of HA still doing the most damage at short range, I just don't think it should be so effective as to negate other more average weapons from being useful in close quarters.

Again, base layout will be a huge factor here.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Xyntech

I'm in favor of HA still doing the most damage at short range, I just don't think it should be so effective as to negate other more average weapons from being useful in close quarters.

Again, base layout will be a huge factor here.

That's how HA currently is. If you're good with the Gauss, Pulsar or Sweeper you can go toe to toe with the average HA user.

[Sirisian]

Originally Posted by Bags

That's how HA currently is. If you're good with the Gauss, Pulsar or Sweeper you can go toe to toe with the average HA user.

Maybe the sweeper. I've never had good luck with the pulsar vs MCG or Jackhammer. The punisher on the other hand has a faster TTK with the grenade and shoot combo so I tended to use that as my primary weapon.

Originally Posted by Bags

Because I like using heavy assault and don't want it turned into a skilless weapon designed to just spray bullets everywhere. There's no need for anything "even remotely different". At all.

Well it wouldn't be skilless. With the reverse damage degradation it allows the firerate to increase to a much higher rate without making it a CQC weapon. You'd see a target, crouch down, then unload leading in front of the target. The person on the receiving end would see a huge slew of bullets hitting around them that at a range of say 50m would do a lot of damage.

A big reason I prefer that is because I personally never used the Lasher much as a VS. The Jackhammer on the NC was basically role overlapped with the sweeper and the MCG was the only effective weapon since it was amazing at CQC, awesome for outdoor combat using burst fire, and could kill at a decent range. So it might be nice as TR to say "yeah let me keep it", but you have to think from the other empires perspective also.

That and using a MCG as a suppressive fire weapon would still net you kills. If there's as much outdoor combat as they're saying like in the trailer it would be a very powerful weapon with its own role.

Basically you end up with:
Shotgun - Rifle - Sniper
For range which is a more logical setup for an FPS game.

[Redshift]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

The Jackhammer on the NC was basically role overlapped with the sweeper and the MCG was the only effective weapon since it was amazing at CQC, awesome for outdoor combat using burst fire, and could kill at a decent range.

The jackhammer was far from role overlap, it was massivly better than a sweeper.

The MCG was alright but tbh not great at either long or short range, it was kind of nice to have a weapon that could be used at both but outside it had nothing on MA and inside it was weaker than the JH by a long way.

When i was on my TR i pretty much just pulled MCG anytime we were near a base, on NC i took a MA or a HA depending on exactly where we were because they're ranges didn't overlap at all.

[Bags]

Originally Posted by Sirisian

Maybe the sweeper. I've never had good luck with the pulsar vs MCG or Jackhammer. The punisher on the other hand has a faster TTK with the grenade and shoot combo so I tended to use that as my primary weapon.

Well obviously if you go against a great player and hit every shot with a Gauss or Pulsar you'll lose, but thankfully every fight isn't a 1v1 against an equally skilled player on equal footing.


Well it wouldn't be skilless. With the reverse damage degradation it allows the firerate to increase to a much higher rate without making it a CQC weapon. You'd see a target, crouch down, then unload leading in front of the target. The person on the receiving end would see a huge slew of bullets hitting around them that at a range of say 50m would do a lot of damage.

Getting "suppression" assists in BF3 doesn't require any skill. I have no idea why it would be different in PS2.

A big reason I prefer that is because I personally never used the Lasher much as a VS.

Your loss.

The Jackhammer on the NC was basically role overlapped with the sweeper

It was better against large groups due to rate of fire and ammo capacity. Also the best CQC HA.


and the MCG was the only effective weapon since it was amazing at CQC, awesome for outdoor combat using burst fire, and could kill at a decent range.

It wasn't "awesome" for outdoor combat; it was decent. I'd take an MA rifle any day, or in the TR's case since the cycler sucked, the heavy scouting rifle. You won't kill a halfways competent MA user with an MCG past 10m.


So it might be nice as TR to say "yeah let me keep it", but you have to think from the other empires perspective also.

I've played all three empires a lot (BR28 and 18 on TR, BR24 and 22 on NC, BR24 and 21 on VS). I like all three empire's heavy assault.

That and using a MCG as a suppressive fire weapon would still net you kills. If there's as much outdoor combat as they're saying like in the trailer it would be a very powerful weapon with its own role.

Spraying and praying across a large distance is not fun.

Basically you end up with:
Shotgun - Rifle - Sniper
For range which is a more logical setup for an FPS game.

That's like, your opinion, man.

Originally Posted by Redshift

The jackhammer was far from role overlap, it was massivly better than a sweeper.

The MCG was alright but tbh not great at either long or short range, it was kind of nice to have a weapon that could be used at both but outside it had nothing on MA and inside it was weaker than the JH by a long way.

When i was on my TR i pretty much just pulled MCG anytime we were near a base, on NC i took a MA or a HA depending on exactly where we were because they're ranges didn't overlap at all.

And this. If I was outside a base or tower I'd pull an MCG on TR, or the appropriate (and better for the situation) HA/MA on the VS or NC.

[SKYeXile]

I dont see why the game needs to be changed into a clone of every other "realistic" "tactical" shooter where rifles are the primary killing weapon, sure make HA move slower, perhaps even make it rexo only(hence rexo moving slower then Agile) but god sakes if you want realism, why in the year whatever the hell it is are front line infantry indoors at close range wearing heavy plate armour firing shitty ass 9mm and energy at eachother with rifles....no they would take BFG's.

[Graywolves]

Weapons used for suppressive fire are also the highest casualty producing weapons.


I didn't really like the way HA was done in PS1. It worked and everything and I could still beat some people with my MA. The HA just felt too much like an upgrade I suppose. Gotta wait and see how it is in PS2.

[Talek Krell]

I'm sort of neutral on the jh and lasher, but I wouldn't mind if the mcg ended up sort of like the minigun/inferno cannon in Global Agenda. For those unaware: It's capable of dealing incredible damage for an extended period of time. It loses accuracy quickly with range however, has a spin/charge up time before it starts firing, and slows or roots you depending on which firing mode you use. In practice you'd often see it used to suppress and distract enemies, but when maneuvered into a good position it can also mow down groups of them (there is no "oh shit" moment quite like hearing an inferno cannon charge up behind you).

Not to mention using one made you feel like a complete badass. >_>

[Kalbuth]

Originally Posted by SKYeXile

I dont see why the game needs to be changed into a clone of every other "realistic" "tactical" shooter where rifles are the primary killing weapon, sure make HA move slower, perhaps even make it rexo only(hence rexo moving slower then Agile) but god sakes if you want realism, why in the year whatever the hell it is are front line infantry indoors at close range wearing heavy plate armour firing shitty ass 9mm and energy at eachother with rifles....no they would take BFG's.

I say again : this is nothing to do with realism, I don't want realism, I'll play ArmA3 for realism

[Accuser]

Originally Posted by Talek Krell

It loses accuracy quickly with range however, has a spin/charge up time before it starts firing, and slows or roots you depending on which firing mode you use.

That sounds like a perfect Heavy Assault weapon. Short->Medium range, small charge time, optional(?) root effect and massive damage.

I really like the charge time and root effect... that would prevent HA from being the only choice for indoors. While HA would be able to lay down the most firepower at close range with the strongest armor, he or she does have to come out of cover and "hold the line" for a moment to put that damage downrange.

[Bags]

Why is HA being the only choice indoors (even though it isn't) a bad thing? Next you'll be complaining that rifles are the only good thing at medium range?

[SKYeXile]

real killwhores use the thumper.

[Accuser]

Originally Posted by Bags

Why is HA being the only choice indoors (even though it isn't) a bad thing? Next you'll be complaining that rifles are the only good thing at medium range?

A few reasons:
1. If I go medic to support my team, I'd like to have some chance against enemies indoors.

2. Everyone using the same weapon indoors is dull. Having unique weapons which have upsides and downsides is interesting. Yes, those are opinions, but I don't think I'm alone in them.

3. If I put lots of certs into agile for exterior mobility, I don't want to be completely worthless indoors compared to 100% superior rexo/HA. Yes there's a tradeoff for those agile abilities, but a HA specialist should be able to help push outdoors and an MA specialist should be able to help push indoors.

4. Insufficient versatility will lead to people dropping out of a location to go to a fight that uses their specialization. For example: If I was certed up to be a great tanker and we clear the CY, is there any motivation for me to go be fodder for enemy HA indoors? Unless HA had some downsides that a tank-certed player could take advantage of, I might as well drive my tank to the next exterior fight.

[NapalmEnima]

Given a Really Long TTK, you actually lose something, tactically speaking: The initial contact loses value. Maneuvering loses value.

You don't see as much manuvering because it's kinda pointless. So what if you spent five minutes sneaking around to the enemy's flank? All one can reasonably expect is maybe one kill and force the others to redeploy. And they'll happily break cover because doing so only hurts them in the long run.

I WANT that tense sprint from one position to the next, not knowing for sure if I'll make it... But knowing that if I sit still for too long I'll be flanked and killed.

I WANT the character caught with their pants down to pay for it with their life. Infantry out in the open with no cover NEED to die to people with superior planing and patience.

If I want to manage resources, I'll go play a strategy game. This is supposed to be an FPS.

I'm not asking for instagib. I would like a couple three well place rifle bursts to drop me at 50 meters. On the one hand, If someone charges out depending on naught but reflexes and bunny-hopping to keep them alive, then they should DIE.

On the other hand, sitting tight in one spot might net you some kills, but as soon as someone flanks you, you're done.

Good tactics (and accuracy-including-headshots, and landing the first shot) should matter. The scenario Trac describes BOTHERS me. If you walk into an ambush you shouldn't be all "gee, I'd better get behind cover so I can fully heal/repair myself and try again", you should be all DEAD.

[SKYeXile]

they have said they you would be able to specilise in mutiple stuff, but it would require a terminal to change....this may however take some to to be able to specilise in multiple things.

but this is the same case in BR20-25 planetside, you choose your specilisation, while tank driver is relitivly cheap, things like Heavy infantry are not. but with rexo and HA you can still go toe to with them, i dont think it would be any different in PS2 in this reguard.